On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 14:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 13:30 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > >>> On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 20:32 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >>>> Hans de Goede wrote: > >>>>> Not true many reviewers review on the latest stable, it says nowhere > >>>>> that a review should be done on rawhide. > >>>> Review is about guidelines and nowhere in the guideline does it even say > >>>> that the fucntionality of the package should be tested. When I suggested > >>>> that it be added I got back a knee jerk reaction to participate in > >>>> reviews myself. > >>>> > >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines:: > >>> > >>> - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as > >>> described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for > >>> example. > >> I suggested that it the "SHOULD" be changed to "MUST". A package that > >> doesnt even start shouldnt be getting past reviews. > > 1. packages never start, applications do. > > Pendantic waste. > > > 2. many applications, when being cluelessly used, only mean they have a > > functional "usage()" > > Which covers base functionality. Bullshit - You apparently don't have any clues about what you are talking about. > > 3. You can't launch anything in library packages. > > Irrelevant to this rule then. Bullshit^2 - It's whether a lib is shipped separately or as part of a set of applications basically is an upstream packaging issue. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
